Low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected USGS continuous-record streamgaging stations in North Carolina through 2012

J. Curtis Weaver

doi:10.3133/sir20155001

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20155001

Low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected USGS continuous-record streamgaging stations in North Carolina through 2012

J. Curtis Weaver

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the North Carolina Division of Water Resources, compiled updated low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected continuous-record streamgages in North Carolina. The compilation of updated streamflow statistics provides regulators and planners with relevant hydrologic information reflective of the recent droughts, which can be used to better manage the quantity and quality of streams in North Carolina. Streamflow records available through the 2012 water year1 were used to determine the annual (based on climatic year2) and winter 7-day, 10-year (7Q10, W7Q10) low-flow discharges, the 30-day, 2-year (30Q2) low-flow discharge, and the 7-day, 2-year (7Q2) low-flow discharge. Consequently, streamflow records available through March 31, 2012 (or the 2011 climatic year) were used to determine the updated low-flow characteristics. Low-flow characteristics were published for 177 unregulated sites, 56 regulated sites, and 33 sites known or considered to be affected by varying degrees of minor regulation and (or) diversions upstream from the streamgages (266 sites total). The updated 7Q10 discharges were compared for 63 streamgages across North Carolina where (1) long-term streamflow record consisted of 30 or more climatic years of data available as of the 1998 climatic year, and (2) streamflows were not known to be regulated. The 7Q10 discharges did not change for 3 sites, whereas increases and decreases were noted at 5 and 55 sites, respectively. Positive changes (increases) ranged from 4.3 percent (site 362) to 34.1 percent (site 112) with a median of 13.2 percent. Negative percentage changes (decreases) ranged from –3.3 percent (site 514) to –80.0 percent (site 308) with a median of –22.2 percent. The median percentage change for all 63 streamgages was –18.4 percent. Streamflow statistics determined as a part of this compilation included minimum, mean, maximum, and flow-duration statistics of daily mean discharges for categorical periods. Flow-duration statistics based on the daily mean discharge records were compiled in this study for the 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles. Flow-duration statistics were determined for each complete water year of record at a streamgage as well as the available period of record (or selected periods if flows were regulated) and selected seasonal, monthly, and calendar day periods. In addition to the streamflow statistics compiled for each of the water years, the number of days the daily mean discharge was at or below the 10th percentile was summed for each water year as well as the number of events during the water year when streamflow was consistently at or below the 10th percentile. All low-flow characteristics for the streamgages were added into the StreamStatsDB, which is a database accessible to users through the recently released USGS StreamStats application for North Carolina. The minimum, mean, maximum, and flow-duration statistics of daily mean discharges based on the available (or selected if regulated flows) period of record were updated in the North Carolina StreamStatsDB. However, for the selected seasonal, monthly, calendar day, and annual water year periods, tab-delimited American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) tables of the streamflow statistics are available online to users from a link provided in the StreamStats application. 1The annual period from October 1 through September 30, designated by the year in which the period ends. 2The annual period from April 1 through March 31, designated by the year in which the period begins.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 33.844517° to 36.588117° latitude; -84.321869° to -75.458659° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

J. Curtis Weaver. 2015-03-12. Low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected USGS continuous-record streamgaging stations in North Carolina through 2012. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20155001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗